Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Nkemdirim Vivien  Ngene

Reign Healthcare

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Representatives

  Self

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00053355-001

19/10/2022

The complainant was employed by the respondent from 10/09/2022 until 10/09/2022 as an agency healthcare worker. She was told that she would be paid €15.00 per hour for day work and €18.00 per hour for night work.  The complainant believes that she was incorrectly paid and is seeking to have the matter rectified by the respondent.  The respondent believes that the complainant was correctly paid.

The complainant commended employment on 10/08/2022 and she understood that her rate of pay was €15.00 per hour for day work and €18.00 per hour for night work.  She provided details of her work hours to her manager who signed off on these and then submitted these time sheet for payment.  The complainant provided copies of her timesheets and copies of her pay slips.  The complainant submits that during her employment with the respondent she was paid a total of €5,851.20 and she submits that there is a further €2,818.80 outstanding.

The complainant also submitted that she was not paid travel money and reimbursed for a receipted expense in relation to a client. 

Following a review of the respondent’s post submission the complainant clarified that the total number of hours work was 613 and not 541.  The complainant referred to the timesheets which were submitted and which will confirms this.

Mr Joshua Amemola gave evidence on behalf of the respondent.  He is the Operations Manager, and the respondent provides health, social care and supports to service users. 

The complainant was employed as a casual worker and was not issued with a contract of employment prior to her leaving.  Her contract was due to be issued at the end of August 2022.  There was also a delay in the complainant getting registered with Revenue.

Mr Amemola reviewed the documents provided by the complainant but as he was unable to clarify the details of the payments and the hours to which these payments related; he was requested by the Adjudicator to provide these details after the hearing.  These were provided and the complainant was given an opportunity to respond to this submission.

The respondent’s representative undertook to look into the expenses which the complainant referred to.

The respondent submits that the complainant worked a total of 541 hours was paid €14.00 per hour and during the course of her employment she was paid €7,574.00 in four separate payments:

1)      27/08/2022:   €1,000

2)      05/09/2022:   €1,008

3)      09/09/2022:  €2,000

4)      22/09/2022:  €3,840

The respondent submits that the complainant was overpaid by €274 and is due €606.92 in holiday pay.

The Payment of Wages Act 1991 defines employee as “a person who has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, entered into or worked under) a contract of employment…”  The Act notes that the term “contract” applies “whether the contract is express or implied and if express, whether it is oral or in writing.”

The Act defines “wages” in relation to an employee: “means any sums payable to the employee by the employer in connection with his employment, including –

(a)    Any fee, bonus or commission, or any holiday, sick or maternity pay, or any other emolument, referable to his employment, whether payable under his contract of employment or otherwise, and

(b)    Any sum payable to the employee upon the termination by the employer of his contract of employment without his having given to the employee the appropriate prior notice of the termination, being a sum paid in lieu of the giving of such notice.”

There is no dispute that the complainant was employed by the respondent on the dates outlined. 

Following a review of the timesheets provided by the complainant and the respondent I am satisfied that the total amount of hours worked by the complainant was 613 hours.  The respondent failed to provide a detailed breakdown of the rate of pay for the various payments made to the complaint. The respondent also failed to provide clarification in relation to the gross and net payments.  It is clear from the timesheets that the complainant worked days and nights.  

The confusion in relation to the complainant’s pay would not have arisen if the respondent took its legal obligation to issue written confirmation of the complainant’s terms and conditions of employment.  These were not still available at the hearing in relation to this matter.   The respondent did not submit any evidence to confirm that the payments were issued to the complainant’s account.

The respondent was not able to provide detailed breakdown of the payments made to the complaint and to provide evidence that these payments were actually made to the complainant.

I have conducted a detailed review and analysis of the information provided.

Based on this analysis and in the absence of any verifiable documentation from the respondent I am satisfied that the complainant was not properly paid for the hours that she worked.  I find that the complainant is due the total sum of €1,7117 which included €1,112 in wages due and €605.00 holiday pay.

I find that the complaint is well founded, and I award the complainant the sum of €1,717 gross in wages.  I order the respondent to pay this amount within 42 days of the date of this decision.

Payment of wages.